Another job no American would want

puremagicpuremagic Posts: 1,907
edited May 2007 in A Moving Train
I guess these are jobs no American would want. Opps, sorry this isn't part of a worker's pass program, just an in your face trade deal. A deal that will put your truck driving husband/father out of job, bust your union, but hey, your sons/daughters and retirees can at least get a non-union job unloading their trucks when they pull up at Walmart, CVS, Walgreens, & Safeway.

http://abclocal.go.com/kfsn/story?section=local&id=5234760

Trucks From Mexico Could Soon Start Hauling In The Valley

04/22/2007 - Trucks from Mexico could begin rolling through the valley as soon as this week. A new trucking program will allow some Mexican big rigs to come freely into the US, prompting concern about its impact on the local trucking industry and air quality.

For the first time in a quarter century, big rigs from south of the border will soon be allowed to haul cargo throughout the US. A one year test project gives 100 Mexican trucking companies the go-ahead to deliver goods to the US and return to Mexico with American goods.

Fresno trucking company owner Jim Ganduglia worries the project could drive him out of business, saying Mexico doesn't have the strict and costly regulations California does, like minimum wage and worker's comp insurance.

Ganduglia says "the bottom line is everyone wants everything cheaper. They don't care how they get it, they don't care where it's grown. They don't care about any of that. It's just 'give it to me cheaper, and I'll take it.'"

Truckers also worry they'll be at a disadvantage if all Mexican trucks are allowed unlimited access after the one year program.

Armando Freire, California Trucking Association, says "when a driver comes out of Mexico with a driver that is one third cost, with fuel that is cheaper than here, and they were able to go all the way up to Northern California and back, how do you compete with that? We can't change our fuel standards, and we can't change our labor standards so that's the problem. It's not that we can't do it cheaper, I can't change the rules we have in our state."

Air quality officials are also concerned, saying big rigs already create half of the summer's pollution in the valley, and Mexican trucks wouldn't fall under their jurisdiction.

Jamie Holt, San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District, says "we need to be looking at ways to get these trucks to be cleaner. We need to get help from the Federal Government to make sure these trucks have to abide by the same standards that our local guys do."

Transportation officials say Mexican trucks will be subject to the same random inspections and inspection station checks as US carriers currently are.

So far, US inspectors have inspected 27 firms in Mexico, but none has gotten clearance to begin participating in the pilot program. Federal transportation officials expect the first clearances may be given by the end of this month or early next month.
SIN EATERS--We take the moral excrement we find in this equation and we bury it down deep inside of us so that the rest of our case can stay pure. That is the job. We are morally indefensible and absolutely necessary.
Post edited by Unknown User on
«1345

Comments

  • Heheheheheheheheheh.....

    "The can do it cheaper because our government has lots of regulations. So we need more regulations."

    God bless America.
  • RushlimboRushlimbo Posts: 832
    Heheheheheheheheheh.....

    "The can do it cheaper because our government has lots of regulations. So we need more regulations."

    God bless America.

    Would you like no regulations on the trucks and drivers? How safe would that be? I'm guessing you dont live near an interstate highway if you say yes.
    War is Peace
    Freedom is Slavery
    Ignorance is Strength
  • yokeyoke Posts: 1,440
    yup... that is another one of those jobs that Americans don't want.
    Thats a lovely accent you have. New Jersey?

    www.seanbrady.net
  • Rushlimbo wrote:
    Would you like no regulations on the trucks and drivers?

    Yes.
    How safe would that be?

    Umm...somewhat?

    How "safe" is it now?
    I'm guessing you dont live near an interstate highway if you say yes.

    About 5 miles. Not sure if that qualifies as "near" or not.
  • RushlimboRushlimbo Posts: 832
    Yes.



    Umm...somewhat?

    How "safe" is it now?



    About 5 miles. Not sure if that qualifies as "near" or not.

    So you would like trucks to not have safety inspections, weight limits, etc..?? Drivers being forced to drive 20 hours nonstop to get their loads on time on impossible schedules? Hell, let's throw out training to qualify as a truck driver as well. Damn regulations.
    War is Peace
    Freedom is Slavery
    Ignorance is Strength
  • Rushlimbo wrote:
    So you would like trucks to not have safety inspections, weight limits, etc..??

    Yes, yes, and most likely yes.
    Drivers being forced to drive 20 hours nonstop to get their loads on time on impossible schedules?

    Forced by whom?
    Hell, let's throw out training to qualify as a truck driver as well.

    Ok.
    Damn regulations.

    That seems to be the consensus of the people in this article, until of course they realize they can use regulations as weapons too.
  • PaperPlatesPaperPlates Posts: 1,745
    we got a long way to go, and a short time to do it, we gonna do what they say can't be done.
    Why go home

    www.myspace.com/jensvad
  • RushlimboRushlimbo Posts: 832
    we got a long way to go, and a short time to do it, we gonna do what they say can't be done.

    I want a Diablo sandwich and a Dr Pepper. Make it fast... I'm in a goddamn hurry.
    War is Peace
    Freedom is Slavery
    Ignorance is Strength
  • blackredyellowblackredyellow Posts: 5,889
    Keep your foot hard on the pedal. Son, never mind them brakes. Let it all hang out 'cause we got a run to make.
    My whole life
    was like a picture
    of a sunny day
    “We can complain because rose bushes have thorns, or rejoice because thorn bushes have roses.”
    ― Abraham Lincoln
  • pjfanatic4pjfanatic4 Posts: 127
    puremagic wrote:
    Armando Freire, California Trucking Association, says "when a driver comes out of Mexico with a driver that is one third cost, with fuel that is cheaper than here, and they were able to go all the way up to Northern California and back, how do you compete with that? .

    Gas isn't cheaper in Mexico... well, at least it's comparable when gas is not on the rise. I understand gas prices do not fluctuate in Mexico, they increase on a consistent basis, month to month. A rip-off in my opinion. Gas is around $2.10 to $2.40 per gallon, depending on the exchange rate you use and the type of gas.

    That NAFTA stuff is a drag, isn't it??
  • pjfanatic4pjfanatic4 Posts: 127
    puremagic wrote:
    So far, US inspectors have inspected 27 firms in Mexico, but none has gotten clearance to begin participating in the pilot program. Federal transportation officials expect the first clearances may be given by the end of this month or early next month.

    This issue has been around for some time. This last paragraph is key, because if the Mexican truckers don't get up to par with the regulations, they won't be allowed to drive in the US. I don't think it's going to be an easy process.
  • know1know1 Posts: 6,794
    I have no problem with this. As far as unions go, they are their own worst enemy, in my opinion.
    The only people we should try to get even with...
    ...are those who've helped us.

    Right 'round the corner could be bigger than ourselves.
  • puremagicpuremagic Posts: 1,907
    pjfanatic4 wrote:
    This issue has been around for some time. This last paragraph is key, because if the Mexican truckers don't get up to par with the regulations, they won't be allowed to drive in the US. I don't think it's going to be an easy process.

    Hopefully not, with no thanks to the gov't.


    http://www.todaystrucking.com/news.cfm?intDocID=17813

    Anti-Mexican truck coalition sues DOT
    04/25/2007

    WASHINGTON -- The Teamsters Union, the U.S.'s largest owner-op group, and environmental lobbyists are taking the federal government to court in attempt to block the Department of Transport's controversial pilot project to allow 100 Mexican truck fleets access to the U.S. market.

    The lawsuit against the DOT's Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration was filed Monday in federal court in California.

    The Teamsters claim the Bush administration violated federal law by failing to "publish proper, advance notice of the pilot project and by not allowing an opportunity for public comment before the program takes effect."
    "The Bush administration is ignoring the American people in its zeal to open our borders to unsafe Mexican trucks," said Teamsters General President Jim Hoffa. "This reckless pilot program must be stopped and the driving public protected."

    Says Todd Spencer, Owner-Operator Independent Drivers Association executive vice-president: "We have strongly opposed this program since first introduced, and in particular, the secretive nature in which it has been presented by the DOT."
    Yesterday, the FMCSA announced it has conducted audits of 27 of the 100 trucking firms selected to apply for the pilot project, which would allow Mexican truckers to haul beyond the 20-mile commercial restriction north of the U.S.-Mexico border for the first time in decades. Like as is the case for Canadian carriers, FMCSA will inspect the fleets for licences, insurance, safety fitness, and driving and medical records of Mexican drivers before they cross the border.

    However, details on how the government plans to ensure compliance are few, complain opponents of the plan.

    "The DOT has still not answered questions about verification of drivers’ records, drug and alcohol testing, hours of service, cabotage, inspections and insurance. They make general statements about audits of Mexican motor carriers, but have shown nothing that should make the American public feel confident that they have fulfilled all the obligations necessary before moving forward," says Spencer.
    <> Congress and the Senate recently approved an amendment to a bill that would temporarily block the program from proceeding, but the legislation may not be enacted before long-haul Mexican trucks are scheduled to start crossing the border in a few days, say the Teamsters.

    "The Bush administration is trying to circumvent safety requirements by repackaging this plan as an illegal pilot program," Hoffa said. "Inspectors can't enforce truck safety in the United States, let alone south of the border." The Bush Administration, acknowledging its obligation under NAFTA, has been trying to lift the restriction to Mexican carriers since 2001.

    In a statement emailed to TodaysTrucking.com, the FMCSA responded to the suit by saying: "(We) have aggressively sought to educate the public about the cross-border demonstration program since it was first proposed in 1994. This program will eliminate unnecessary delays clogging commerce at our borders, bring consumers lower prices and give our economy new energy while maintaining the safety of our roads.

    "We have worked extensively with Congress and the Office of the Inspector General to implement this program and its many safety standards and are prepared to defend the program in court."

    Joining OOIDA and the Teamsters in the lawsuit are special interest group Public Citizen, the Sierra Club, and the Environmental Law Foundation.
    SIN EATERS--We take the moral excrement we find in this equation and we bury it down deep inside of us so that the rest of our case can stay pure. That is the job. We are morally indefensible and absolutely necessary.
  • blackredyellowblackredyellow Posts: 5,889
    Yes, yes, and most likely yes.



    Forced by whom?



    Ok.



    That seems to be the consensus of the people in this article, until of course they realize they can use regulations as weapons too.

    I'm not sure that I understand your desire to eliminate all trucking regulations...

    Regulations have been put in place over the years because of numerous fatalities and tragic accidents. Overweight trucks not being able to stop in time, drivers falling asleep at the wheel, accidents caused by drivers jacked up on stimulants, etc.

    If all of the regulations were removed, many drivers and companies would go back to these practices, and cause a lot more deaths. I am sure that some companies and drivers do operate outside the regulations, but I don't see a reason to open the door for all of them to.

    I am generally against industry regulations that if they are just put in place just to help even competition or whatever, but I think regulations are important when you are talking about innocent people's lives.
    My whole life
    was like a picture
    of a sunny day
    “We can complain because rose bushes have thorns, or rejoice because thorn bushes have roses.”
    ― Abraham Lincoln
  • Dustin51Dustin51 Posts: 222
    It’s tough because we certainly want Mexico to be a better place to live. The better Mexico is doing the, more jobs available to Mexican citizens within Mexico the fewer problems we’ll have with illegal immigration.

    The problem is when giving jobs to Mexican citizens we shouldn’t be looking to sacrifice our own workers in the process.

    So how do we accomplish that? How do we help Mexico without sacrificing our own well being?

    I do agree that American companies need to be held accountable, they need to show that their own bottom lines are just as important as being good citizens. Unfortunately I think most of us would agree that their profits are the most important thing to these companies, far surpassing any feeling of loyalty towards the American public.

    As we continue down the path of globalization and as more and more nations try to provide products and services cheaper then Americans are able to do these questions will be become more and more prevalent and I don’t believe there is an easy answer.

    The one thing that I will say about this particular situation though is that these companies in Mexico should absolutely be forced to play by the same rules as their American competitors. If they want to play ball they need to play by our rules and not the other way around.
    Be excellent to each other
  • farfromglorifiedfarfromglorified Posts: 5,696
    I'm not sure that I understand your desire to eliminate all trucking regulations...

    I'm not sure I understand your desire to keep them.
    Regulations have been put in place over the years because of numerous fatalities and tragic accidents. Overweight trucks not being able to stop in time, drivers falling asleep at the wheel, accidents caused by drivers jacked up on stimulants, etc.

    So your regulations have ended this?
    If all of the regulations were removed, many drivers and companies would go back to these practices, and cause a lot more deaths. I am sure that some companies and drivers do operate outside the regulations, but I don't see a reason to open the door for all of them to.

    You don't see a reason? Why don't you read the article again.
    I am generally against industry regulations that if they are just put in place just to help even competition or whatever, but I think regulations are important when you are talking about innocent people's lives.

    Awesome. I think a lack of violence is important when you are talking about innocent people's lives.
  • Dustin51Dustin51 Posts: 222
    Farfromglorified,

    Are you really suggesting we end all regulation on the trucking industry? I can't believe you or anyone would actually take that stance.

    Are you just playing devils's advocate?
    Be excellent to each other
  • farfromglorifiedfarfromglorified Posts: 5,696
    Dustin51 wrote:
    Farfromglorified,

    Are you really suggesting we end all regulation on the trucking industry? I can't believe you or anyone would actually take that stance.

    Are you just playing devils's advocate?

    Yes to both of your questions, actually.
  • my2handsmy2hands Posts: 17,117
    know1 wrote:
    I have no problem with this. As far as unions go, they are their own worst enemy, in my opinion.


    organized labor is one of the great accomplishments in this country's history. i always find anti-union americans a little strange. perhaps they dont know their history, or perhaps they think they shouldnt have a collective voice or rights as workers? maybe you also are in favor of child labor? or unsafe working conditions? or forced over time? where do you think employer provided health care and other various benefits came from? employer's being nice guys? give me a break, that had to be forced by the workers, collectively.

    now this doesnt mean that every union is ran well, or ran approprately.
  • know1know1 Posts: 6,794
    Dustin51 wrote:
    The problem is when giving jobs to Mexican citizens we shouldn’t be looking to sacrifice our own workers in the process.

    Who are "our own workers"?

    To me, if it's John Smith who I don't know who has the job, or Jose Lopez who I don't know who has it...it makes no difference whatsoever.
    The only people we should try to get even with...
    ...are those who've helped us.

    Right 'round the corner could be bigger than ourselves.
  • my2handsmy2hands Posts: 17,117
    Yes to both of your questions, actually.


    since you are so against any form of government regulation perhaps you dont believe in red lights, speed limits or other traffic regulations?
  • my2handsmy2hands Posts: 17,117
    know1 wrote:
    Who are "our own workers"?

    To me, if it's John Smith who I don't know who has the job, or Jose Lopez who I don't know who has it...it makes no difference whatsoever.


    so people dont matter if you dont know them? thats nice
  • know1know1 Posts: 6,794
    my2hands wrote:
    organized labor is one of the great accomplishments in this country's history. i always find anti-union americans a little strange. perhaps they dont know their history, or perhaps they think they shouldnt have a collective voice or rights as workers? maybe you also are in favor of child labor? or unsafe working conditions? or forced over time? where do you think employer provided health care and other various benefits came from? employer's being nice guys? give me a break, that had to be forced by the workers, collectively.

    now this doesnt mean that every union is ran well, or ran approprately.

    I'm not saying that Unions did not accomplish a lot and should be respected for those accomplishments in the past, but...

    ..times have changed and with the improvements in technology, transportation, and communication as well as the availablity of lawyers itching for litigation, they are just not needed and are doing themselves a disservice.
    The only people we should try to get even with...
    ...are those who've helped us.

    Right 'round the corner could be bigger than ourselves.
  • farfromglorifiedfarfromglorified Posts: 5,696
    my2hands wrote:
    since you are so against any form of government regulation perhaps you dont believe in red lights, speed limits or other traffic regulations?

    Hehe....

    I certainly believe in "red lights, speed limits or other traffic regulations". I just find it entertaining that so many people think lights can't be red, speeds can't be limited, or traffic cannot be regulated without your precious governments.
  • know1know1 Posts: 6,794
    my2hands wrote:
    so people dont matter if you dont know them? thats nice

    That's not at all what I was saying. I'm saying that it does not matter to me who has the job. I don't favor some American that I don't know over a Mexican or Hispanic person that I don't know either. Either one can have it as far as I'm concerned.
    The only people we should try to get even with...
    ...are those who've helped us.

    Right 'round the corner could be bigger than ourselves.
  • blackredyellowblackredyellow Posts: 5,889
    I'm not sure I understand your desire to keep them.
    safety

    So your regulations have ended this?
    ended, no - but I would imagine that these types of accidents have been greatly reduced
    You don't see a reason? Why don't you read the article again.
    I'm not specifically talking about the article... if Mexican drivers/companies can do the job cheaper, while following the same safety regulations as US drivers, then more power to them.

    I just don't want thousands of exhausted people hopped up on speed driving over-weight trucks alongside me on the highway. I will take my chances with the few that break the law, but I don't want all of them pushing the boundaries.
    Awesome. I think a lack of violence is important when you are talking about innocent people's lives.
    What does violence have to do with this?
    My whole life
    was like a picture
    of a sunny day
    “We can complain because rose bushes have thorns, or rejoice because thorn bushes have roses.”
    ― Abraham Lincoln
  • my2handsmy2hands Posts: 17,117
    Hehe....

    I certainly believe in "red lights, speed limits or other traffic regulations". I just find it entertaining that so many people think lights can't be red, speeds can't be limited, or traffic cannot be regulated without your precious governments.

    ok, and how would they be regulated then?
  • farfromglorifiedfarfromglorified Posts: 5,696
    safety

    Then why don't you just ban trucks?
    ended, no - but I would imagine that these types of accidents have been greatly reduced

    So in other words your imagination should dictate policy?
    I'm not specifically talking about the article... if Mexican drivers/companies can do the job cheaper, while following the same safety regulations as US drivers, then more power to them.

    Hehe...don't you find it ironic that you used the word "power" there?
    I just don't want thousands of exhausted people hopped up on speed driving over-weight trucks alongside me on the highway. I will take my chances with the few that break the law, but I don't want all of them pushing the boundaries.

    So in other words your wants should dictate the behaviors of others?
    What does violence have to do with this?

    You tell me. What happens to the Mexican I hire tomorrow who agrees to bring something to me in NC on a truck?
  • my2handsmy2hands Posts: 17,117
    know1 wrote:
    That's not at all what I was saying. I'm saying that it does not matter to me who has the job. I don't favor some American that I don't know over a Mexican or Hispanic person that I don't know either. Either one can have it as far as I'm concerned.

    until your the american that lost his job.


    ps... i do not blame the immigrant, legal or illegal. i blame the employer that hires them for half what he would have to pay an american while they also can cut out health care and other various benefits secured by the american labor movement.
  • farfromglorifiedfarfromglorified Posts: 5,696
    my2hands wrote:
    ok, and how would they be regulated then?

    By the rules of the market, of course.

    See, here's the thing. You don't just want regulation. You want to be a regulator. You want things done how you want them to be done. The irony of this is you'll invoke words like "common good" and "the people" and "our workers", while elements of all those damn your regulations.
Sign In or Register to comment.